The High Court at Patna rejected a writ petition for want of prosecution as no petitioner appeared to inform about steps taken to remove defects by 11-03-2019.
None granted; writ petition rejected for want of prosecution due to absence of petitioners.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.4707 of 2019
======================================================
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Sukh Ram, son of Late Gopal Prasad, Resident of Village- Musharwa, P.S.Sati District- West Champaran (Bihar)
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : For the Respondent/s :
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. ANJANA MISHRA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE)
2 11-03-2019 No one is present on behalf of the petitioners to
inform the Court about any steps having been taken for removing the defects.
The writ petition is, accordingly, rejected for want of prosecution.
(Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ)
(Anjana Mishra, J)
P.K.P./-Jagdish
U
General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur
Officer of the Sr. Manager Divisional, Finance Manager, East Central Railway, Samastipur
D.R.M., East Central Railway, Samastipur
Sukh Ram
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
Anjana Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
